This is a discussion on Squid: a Low performance Web proxy cache ? - squid ; Greetings, I've been using squid for years on end in my home network, without much problems, or so I thought, and I'm still not sure. The other day however, I discovered that through an ethereal DSL problem solving session, that ...
I've been using squid for years on end in my home network, without
much problems, or so I thought, and I'm still not sure.
The other day however, I discovered that through an ethereal DSL
problem solving session, that squid was making HTTP 1.0 requests.
I then discovered that squid never makes any HTTP 1.1 request. This
means no keep-alive.
I did notice that squid makes many connections, so it's possible that
leveraging http 1.1's keep-alive isn't going to make internet browsing
But then again it may. A site with frames for instance. Squid and/or
the browser does not know what to get next, after interpreting the
Applies to POST requests too. Recycling the TCP connection will
result in a faster response time.
So, if that's true, how come Squid is the unambigeous king of the
proxy world for years on end, while perhaps (if I'm right) a different
HTTP 1.1 compliant proxy server could proxy circles around Squid?
Another issue, not exactly related to the above.
Slight problem with my DSL isp. If I too quickly make too many
requests (I do this by control clicking in Mozilla, opening, but
activating a new tab), I get problems with a PPP echo request not
making it in time, and the DSL connection gets interrupted.
For instance, if I go to images.google.com, search for stuff, and
control click, and open 8 websites in under 5 seconds, squid then
seems to saturate my DSL connection, and my DSL connection breaks,
because it's echo request is failing, not getting answered in time.
I could increase the ping wait time, but I'm not 100% sure if this is
what the problem is.
Is it also possible to tell squid not to open so many connections,
tell it to ease off a tad, essentially?
Thanks in advance for any reply.